pitmaster

An excellent benchmark except that since we don't play north until the last round - and again in Hobart - you'll have your answer long before then.

He did no good for the Sharks so I vote we keep well away.

Geelong and West Coast both aided by massive home ground advantage which always gives them a head start. With their lists they'll still be there you would reckon although a lot of the Eagles' best are ageing. I am hoping, not yet expecting them to drop quickly. Richmond and Giants both good enough and hungry enough to be right in it. Lions had an amazing injury-free run but even without that they have built a very good list and I expect them to be back. That leaves Collingwood, Essendon and the Dogs. Essendon are in strife and are most likely to miss according to notables like K Cornes. As for the other two, I think they are both vulnerable depending on injuries and results in close games, but the Dogs moreso. The Woods consistently over achieve. So two or possibly three places up for grabs tops. It doesn't leave much room for error but anything less than finals would be a big disappointment.

So let me guess, you think the Weed needs to do more to justify his place? I could buy that argument but I think he needs persistence. That prompts an interesting thought: must a Best 22 be the best side you can field on any given day, or could it be the Best 22 you can field today while developing for the long term. If it's the latter, then Weid is, in my humble op, in that team.

Also indicated Weid and AVB ain't...and that ain't so. They are best 22 if everyone is fit.

It would be easy to under-estimate the importance of this announcement. For a club that has struggled to retain sponsors for much more than a couple of years - think Primus, Hankook, Webjet, Kaspersky, Opel, Asics (I think) - this , and Jaguar backing up, is a very good sign. Compare our record to ordinary clubs like Norf (Mazda for ever) and the Dogs (stole Mission from us and have retained them for seven or eight years) and you realise it's long overdue for us to build some relationships that stick. So well done Pertie. Now get us a home.

P***head might though.

Thanks for that. The full table (30K in the first week of December) suggests we are 2000 behind last year. And it's too late to buy them as Christmas presents, so...it might be slow this time around.

Well said Ernie. Just re-committed for myself and several others. I was told the current number is closing on 28,000 so the positive they are putting on that is that more than half the members from 2020 had signed up as of this morning. Anyone here know the pre-Christmas total last year?

Agree on NicNat (finally, but for years he was for me limited to a highlight reel. His impact on games when fit now is excellent). Not so much on Kreuzer. He has never dominated they way big blokes are supposed to and it's been a long time since the K Cup. (We weren't even tanking then! They were.) Meanwhile Buckenara (far from my most favourite person) has Jackson at 17 in the Hun today, although it's unclear if that is how he rates him or where he thinks he will go. I think it's the former. Maybe he's setting us up for a bagging when we pick the kid. I don't pretend to know better than those who watch these kids for a living but LJ makes me nervous. I'd be happier if he was a Victorian or Tasmanian, or even from SA. But once with us home is a long way off.

Ruckman as very early draft picks are scary...and mixed. Josh Fraser, mishandled by Malthouse and failed to meet expectations. Jeff White, fantastic until rule changes limited his impact. Any others?

No to the first question. As to the emboldened remark it was said explicitly the club believes it already has a list capable of getting the job done.

One thing I love about demonland is the complete lack of nuance. Something is either true or "TOTAL BS". Goodwin was making a point in the context of a discussion about playing a contested brand of footy, cohesion between players and efficiency in implementing the game plan. He's talking about what for what of a better word is now described as a "brand". I read it as Plan A is how we want to play. What happens when it's not working is shifts in tempo, individuals put into different positions, using one stopping player or two, or none at all. Plan A is our strategy. Those shifts in-game are tactics. Tactics change according to how the opposition wants to play, but the way we want to play - Plan A - does not change. Shifts in tactics are intended to enable us to play to our agreed strategy.

Folks here have done a pretty good job of covering the night so I'll only add a couple of clarifications. Pert said the proposed social club and other facilities were wanted "within walking distance of the MCG", which probably kills the Bartlett oval speciation. His speech is online so no need to go into anything else here except he stressed the Alice Springs game would only come home when it made financial sense. We're there for at least the next four years. The clown who ripped into Oscar identified himself only as "Ian" and said he went to the football with his brother. Goodie in response pointed out that Oscar had double hip surgery off season, missed four months of training and was unable to build his strength to the level he needed to do the job being asked of him. He said Oscar would not have been satisfied with his year. Goodwin finished with: "I have unwavering faith in Oscar McDonald becoming the player we want him to be." The question why keep Oscar and get rid of Frost had already been answered, sort of, when Goodwin talked about players needing to have cohesion and the ability to know what their team mates were going to do before they did it. That rules out Frostball, I reckon. The most telling part of the presentation was Mahoney's chart on the time midfielders spent in pre-season. Apart from Gawn none of the regulars with more than 48% prep time. I also liked Goodwin's response to the Plan B question which might raise a few eyebrows here: "There are not too many clubs with a Plan B: you get Plan A right you are a successful club" (Not an absolutely direct quote. I missed a few words there but that's the gist.)

I'll be there and will report but not before Wednesday.

A Night At The Opera sounds about right. Stateroom scene.

mmmm...actually appears human

Lockhart?

Cornes overstates his case. He makes it sound like May and Lever have finished their careers. Those deals can't be deemed fails for some time yet. But that's how you make a career in the footy media if you're not a professional, with selective reasoning and cherry picked facts.

Three out of state games in the first five weeks...and bloody Geelong and damn Hobart again! Giants and Tigers on short turnarounds in the first six weeks. Set up to struggle. Hopefully Burgess has us fit and ready to fire - we're gonna need be ready.

Correct, as in "Woolloongabba".

Our recent record over there is good. Their old geezers will be that much older...ripe for picking. Could be a huge win. At the least I'd expect a massive effort pushing them to the line.

I am a bit surprised that in the trade wash-up there is much talk about our lack of small forwards and no talk of Lockhart as a possible answer. He has dash and in his first year found the goal consistently if not spectacularly with 9 goals in 12 games in a team with a non-functioning forward line. He could not have had a more demanding debut year than 2019 with us yet showed promise. He's early 20s so close to mature and will only improve with a serious pre-season.

Good points. The centre bounce ruck rule changed, robbing White of the chance to use his leap. He should have been shifted to the forward line where his leap would have been a weapon and we should have gone to a beanpole first ruck.

Not taking it well, then? Never mind. I love dogs and I'll file that under 'Compliments (Unintended)'.